Bullpups, good alternative to AR pistols?

[JRB]

Speaking from personal experience from instructing Soldiers of all shapes and sizes, the LOP is absolutely critical for proper control of the weapon in FA/burst, or with higher recoiling weapons. It is also critical for maximizing the number of possible firing positions that are comfortable, stable, and repeatable for a given shooter. One of the first steps I take when 'retraining' a Soldier that is struggling with zeroing or qualification is to see the 'fit' of their IOTV and how they adjust & hold their assigned rifle. I have seen a lot of Soldiers show *immediate* improvements just by getting them to properly adjust their buttstock to match their size and their gear. Tons of Soldiers run it all the way out because of some SNCO telling them to, while others run it damn near fully collapsed because it's easier to carry that way.
Bullpups significantly limit that adjustment window because the LOP is very long. If it's adjustable, the adjustability range is from 'very long' to 'way too long'.
Not an issue for folks that are 6ft3, but definitely an issue for a shitload of folks in the 5ft range like I am.

I'm 5ft 9in, so I'm just barely not a 'manlet'. If I'm wearing body armor, my arms are not long enough to safely fire an M203 mounted to an M16A2 or other A2 stocked weapon. I can barely physically do it, but sight alignment is out of the question and it's blatantly unsafe.
Simply changing the buttstock to the M4 style adjustable buttstock kit and suddenly the exact same combined weapon system is very effective and easy for me to use.

While that is an extreme example, the same applies to the very long LOP with bullpups when combined with smaller statured shooters, body armor, and optics or other sights with a specific eyebox. While the shooter might be able to use the weapon, even use it effectively, the longer LOP limits comfort, recoil control, and available ad-hoc/hasty firing positions or stabilization techniques.

While not relevant to rifles, I've seen this as well in my own recreational experience with some of the cheap shotguns on the market these days. The awkwardly long LOP found on both the bullpup and the traditional pattern imported McShotguns often makes it a right bastard for smaller folks to comfortably fire them, even with a massively bladed stance while standing. Meanwhile, those same shooters have a much easier time both with shooting well and with recoil control with an old Mossberg or 870 using a youth stock, or something like a Mesa Tactical AR pattern buttstock adjusted to a suitable LOP for them.

tl;dr I firmly believe that the LOP measurement on bullpups is just as significant and important as it is on traditional pattern rifles, and the long LOP is one of the biggest disadvantages of a bullpup especially for institutional users.

[Colt191145lover]

Speaking from personal experience from instructing Soldiers of all shapes and sizes, the LOP is absolutely critical for proper control of the weapon in FA/burst, or with higher recoiling weapons. It is also critical for maximizing the number of possible firing positions that are comfortable, stable, and repeatable for a given shooter. One of the first steps I take when 'retraining' a Soldier that is struggling with zeroing or qualification is to see the 'fit' of their IOTV and how they adjust & hold their assigned rifle. I have seen a lot of Soldiers show *immediate* improvements just by getting them to properly adjust their buttstock to match their size and their gear. Tons of Soldiers run it all the way out because of some SNCO telling them to, while others run it damn near fully collapsed because it's easier to carry that way.
Bullpups significantly limit that adjustment window because the LOP is very long. If it's adjustable, the adjustability range is from 'very long' to 'way too long'.
Not an issue for folks that are 6ft3, but definitely an issue for a shitload of folks in the 5ft range like I am.

I'm 5ft 9in, so I'm just barely not a 'manlet'. If I'm wearing body armor, my arms are not long enough to safely fire an M203 mounted to an M16A2 or other A2 stocked weapon. I can barely physically do it, but sight alignment is out of the question and it's blatantly unsafe.
Simply changing the buttstock to the M4 style adjustable buttstock kit and suddenly the exact same combined weapon system is very effective and easy for me to use.

While that is an extreme example, the same applies to the very long LOP with bullpups when combined with smaller statured shooters, body armor, and optics or other sights with a specific eyebox. While the shooter might be able to use the weapon, even use it effectively, the longer LOP limits comfort, recoil control, and available ad-hoc/hasty firing positions or stabilization techniques.

While not relevant to rifles, I've seen this as well in my own recreational experience with some of the cheap shotguns on the market these days. The awkwardly long LOP found on both the bullpup and the traditional pattern imported McShotguns often makes it a right bastard for smaller folks to comfortably fire them, even with a massively bladed stance while standing. Meanwhile, those same shooters have a much easier time both with shooting well and with recoil control with an old Mossberg or 870 using a youth stock, or something like a Mesa Tactical AR pattern buttstock adjusted to a suitable LOP for them.

tl;dr I firmly believe that the LOP measurement on bullpups is just as significant and important as it is on traditional pattern rifles, and the long LOP is one of the biggest disadvantages of a bullpup especially for institutional users.

Well said!

[UNM1136]

Required disclaimer: I am not licensed in NM, and have done no legal research of NM statutes, case law, or any other authority.. Okay, with that out of the way…

Arizona has some case law related to this issue in cases involving fanny packs in the 90s before our Constitutional Carry statute. Although AZ law is not controlling in NM, if a state has not addressed an issue, its courts will often consider decisions in jurisdictions that are either close by or have similar laws.

“We believe that the legislature intended to prohibit a person from carrying a concealed weapon on his or her person in a manner readily accessible for immediate use unless the conveyance utilized to carry the weapon reasonably would place others on notice that such person is armed. ‘Fanny packs’ do not give such notice. On one hand, conspicuously carrying a holster or scabbard gives notice to most people that one is armed. On the other hand, carrying a concealed weapon in a ‘fanny pack’—or for that matter in a purse, backpack, lunch box, briefcase, or other conveyance that is specially designed to carry a concealed weapon—does not.”

State v. Moerman, 182 Ariz. 255, 261, 895 P.2d 1018 (App. 1994).

If I were a NM prosecutor, without clear authority from NM addressing this issue, I would cite this case as an argument that anything other than a clearly-identifiable weapons case fell constituted a concealed weapon. There’s plenty of case law floating around from drug possession cases regarding actual and constructive possession to argue that a slung backpack fell within actual possession on your person.

All I know about your law comes from this thread, but that’s enough to make me think that carrying a second pistol in a discrete backpack would run afoul of NM law. YMMV and YLIS (Your Mileage May Vary and Your Law Is Stupid).

Some of us carried for YEARS before concealed carry in this state was legalized. Caselaw overshadowed the statute when an officer arrested a guy for CCW because he "recognized the fannypack the Defendant was using as a holster, and since the obvious holster was exposed, the firearm was exposed". I don't have the citation immediately available!, but it was taught in my Academy in 1998., and by then I had been crying a half decade. It is largely irrelevant now, and we carried knowing we would still be arrested, most likely to be vindicated atntrial. "You might beat the charge, but you won't beat the ride" was our mantra.

I am not an attorney, butI would think that movement of a piece of personally owned private property from one protected location to another (vehicle to residence or vice versa) would be reasonable. Getting jacked up between your car and home just doesn't make sense unless you are already on someone's radar for something, or you are at the hands of a cop who doesn't know what they don't know. Which is not out of the realm of possibility, either.

pat

[UNM1136]

[QUOTE=Colt191145lover;1445680]

Thats the issue I'm struggling with here, because its the weapon length and layout, not LOP, that influences the controls distance on the bullpup:


The fire controls are still pushed father forward than a AR and adding heavy clothing or PC makes it awkward for some of us. Measuring from the face of the trigger to the rear of the stock tells us a lot.

There are people whose arms are too short to both reach the pistol grip and shoulder the rifle comfortably. Not a problem for someone like me who is 5’11” with orangutan arms. Not workable for a someone that’s 5’0” tall whose elbow is almost hyper extended just trying to reach the trigger with the rifle butt in their shoulder.

That’s one of the reasons you see kids and small framed people awkwardly leaning back when when firing a rifle or shotgun that has too long of a l.o.p they’re often trying make room for the stock to fit between their hand and shoulder.

Speaking from personal experience from instructing Soldiers of all shapes and sizes, the LOP is absolutely critical for proper control of the weapon in FA/burst, or with higher recoiling weapons. It is also critical for maximizing the number of possible firing positions that are comfortable, stable, and repeatable for a given shooter. One of the first steps I take when 'retraining' a Soldier that is struggling with zeroing or qualification is to see the 'fit' of their IOTV and how they adjust & hold their assigned rifle. I have seen a lot of Soldiers show *immediate* improvements just by getting them to properly adjust their buttstock to match their size and their gear. Tons of Soldiers run it all the way out because of some SNCO telling them to, while others run it damn near fully collapsed because it's easier to carry that way.
Bullpups significantly limit that adjustment window because the LOP is very long. If it's adjustable, the adjustability range is from 'very long' to 'way too long'.
Not an issue for folks that are 6ft3, but definitely an issue for a shitload of folks in the 5ft range like I am.

I'm 5ft 9in, so I'm just barely not a 'manlet'. If I'm wearing body armor, my arms are not long enough to safely fire an M203 mounted to an M16A2 or other A2 stocked weapon. I can barely physically do it, but sight alignment is out of the question and it's blatantly unsafe.
Simply changing the buttstock to the M4 style adjustable buttstock kit and suddenly the exact same combined weapon system is very effective and easy for me to use.

While that is an extreme example, the same applies to the very long LOP with bullpups when combined with smaller statured shooters, body armor, and optics or other sights with a specific eyebox. While the shooter might be able to use the weapon, even use it effectively, the longer LOP limits comfort, recoil control, and available ad-hoc/hasty firing positions or stabilization techniques.

While not relevant to rifles, I've seen this as well in my own recreational experience with some of the cheap shotguns on the market these days. The awkwardly long LOP found on both the bullpup and the traditional pattern imported McShotguns often makes it a right bastard for smaller folks to comfortably fire them, even with a massively bladed stance while standing. Meanwhile, those same shooters have a much easier time both with shooting well and with recoil control with an old Mossberg or 870 using a youth stock, or something like a Mesa Tactical AR pattern buttstock adjusted to a suitable LOP for them.

tl;dr I firmly believe that the LOP measurement on bullpups is just as significant and important as it is on traditional pattern rifles, and the long LOP is one of the biggest disadvantages of a bullpup especially for institutional users.

My experience as well. I have wanted a bullpup (AUG) since seeing a photo of @Mas using one while handling the Akita Sunshine's Katana in the 80s/90s. A light bulb went off and YES! A bullpup is for one hand free. Working a dog, carrying a kid, opening doors. The leverage of the working parts behind the grip also made it less tiring to carry during searches and perimeters. Academically I think work in and around vehicles would also benefit. Every local patrol canine handler I know is also a SWAT dude(ette) who deploys an M4 or Mk18 type AR, on every search even if he/she is searching with a muzzled dog. And we have been on some LOOONG searches together.

But there are drawbacks, LOP being a big one, particularly based on shooting style and loadout/gear. I have long arms, hands, and fingers, and even I run youth stocked shotguns better and more comfortably than standard stocked gauges. If I could carry an AUG I would, for a while, to give it decent shakeout compared to my current AR that does what I need at the moment. Then a rational decision on which is better for me can be made on what is better for me in my circumstances.

pat

[spyderco monkey]

[QUOTE=UNM1136;1446039]

My experience as well. I have wanted a bullpup (AUG) since seeing a photo of @Mas using one while handling the Akita Sunshine's Katana in the 80s/90s. A light bulb went off and YES! A bullpup is for one hand free. Working a dog, carrying a kid, opening doors. The leverage of the working parts behind the grip also made it less tiring to carry during searches and perimeters. Academically I think work in and around vehicles would also benefit. Every local patrol canine handler I know is also a SWAT dude(ette) who deploys an M4 or Mk18 type AR, on every search even if he/she is searching with a muzzled dog. And we have been on some LOOONG searches together.

But there are drawbacks, LOP being a big one, particularly based on shooting style and loadout/gear. I have long arms, hands, and fingers, and even I run youth stocked shotguns better and more comfortably than standard stocked gauges. If I could carry an AUG I would, for a while, to give it decent shakeout compared to my current AR that does what I need at the moment. Then a rational decision on which is better for me can be made on what is better for me in my circumstances.

pat

If you get a chance to try an AUG or other bullpup, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The LOP effect with a bullpup is vastly different then that of a conventional rifle, and especially compared to the LOP importance for a shotgun. It really is a different animal.

The AUG has a 15" LOP. In a conventional assault rifle, that would be borderline unusable, and with a shotgun that would be an abomination unto god.

But with a bullpup that just isn't the case, as the design is completely different.

[UNM1136]

[QUOTE=spyderco monkey;1446062]

If you get a chance to try an AUG or other bullpup, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The LOP effect with a bullpup is vastly different then that of a conventional rifle, and especially compared to the LOP importance for a shotgun. It really is a different animal.

The AUG has a 15" LOP. In a conventional assault rifle, that would be borderline unusable, and with a shotgun that would be an abomination unto god.

But with a bullpup that just isn't the case, as the design is completely different.

Oh, I have tried it. That is why I like it. But I am relied upon to make decisions for more than just myself, and square range shooting is not deployment. I have left handed holsters to train left handed shooters. By running it, I meant using It in my environment. I am the only cop in my agency running optics on a pistol despite some non-influential opposition. I don't mind trying new things out on my own for the agency; equipment or tactics. Now I have a mandate to develop policies and training for PMOs by the end of the year.

I don't know where you are, but if you want to come to a range day, I can provide a reaonable number of body types to shoot your admittedly desirable Austrian Kinda Long Gun. If it works for my shooters, once we can get the bean counters on board I would name the policy of issuing AUGs after you.

I don't have shorter arms than I have, so whether bullpups are wonderful regardless of arms' length is not a decision I can make for others without a lot of observation. Of shorter armed shooters shooting it. So my observations are currently limited to what I have done shooting. Again, shooting, not deploying, which includes not only shooting, but manipulating, securing, tactics, and logistics. Given the cost I don't expect much traction without a lot of supporting data.

I want you to be right, but I am an institutional user, and the bullpup would have a lot to prove to displace the current standard.

pat

[JRB]

If you get a chance to try an AUG or other bullpup, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

The LOP effect with a bullpup is vastly different then that of a conventional rifle, and especially compared to the LOP importance for a shotgun. It really is a different animal.

The AUG has a 15" LOP. In a conventional assault rifle, that would be borderline unusable, and with a shotgun that would be an abomination unto god.

But with a bullpup that just isn't the case, as the design is completely different.

When it comes to center of gravity and handling, especially one-handed - I absolutely agree.
The CG being at or slightly behind the pistol grip does make them just wonderful for ease of carry and handling, and shooting offhand with a bladed or target-shooting style stance without a sling. I'm pretty sure I could shoot my FS2000 offhand all day and my trigger finger would fatigue from the kinda weird trigger before my arms would get tired.

But when it comes to running the weapon while wearing armor, or dealing with smaller shooters especially those below about 5ft 6in, all the stuff I posted previously does apply.

[TGS]

But with a bullpup that just isn't the case, as the design is completely different.

From the outside looking in:

You seem pretty adamant about this and keep repeating the same thing in a very unconvincing manner, whereas we have several people with institutional experience on the platforms with a wide variety of shooters who are detailing the issue in very clear, logical, and convincing detail.

[spyderco monkey]

From the outside looking in:

You seem pretty adamant about this and keep repeating the same thing in a very unconvincing manner, whereas we have several people with institutional experience on the platforms with a wide variety of shooters who are detailing the issue in very clear, logical, and convincing detail.

I could take one last crack, full essay on the differences if that would be more convincing.

Ultimately I suspect people are confusing the problems of having a fixed, non adjustable stock (a legitimate downside of bullpups) with length of pull (which I argue is overstated).

[spyderco monkey]

[QUOTE=UNM1136;1446080]

I don't know where you are, but if you want to come to a range day, I can provide a reaonable number of body types to shoot your admittedly desirable Austrian Kinda Long Gun. If it works for my shooters, once we can get the bean counters on board I would name the policy of issuing AUGs after you.

I don't have shorter arms than I have, so whether bullpups are wonderful regardless of arms' length is not a decision I can make for others without a lot of observation. Of shorter armed shooters shooting it. So my observations are currently limited to what I have done shooting. Again, shooting, not deploying, which includes not only shooting, but manipulating, securing, tactics, and logistics. Given the cost I don't expect much traction without a lot of supporting data.

I want you to be right, but I am an institutional user, and the bullpup would have a lot to prove to displace the current standard.

pat

I would love to do that sort of ballistic/ergonomic gun science experiment, and have 2 AUGs I'd be happy to put forward for testing. I live in Las Vegas, so sorta driveable to ABQ. Currently out in Florida helping family, but perhaps in a few months?

For institutional users, aside from cost / retraining / small parts availability (of which really nothing competes with the AR) I suspect the primary issue would be having a fixed stock rather than length of pull.

Whereas an AR can compensate hugely for different body types by changing the length of the stock, a bullpup can only be tailored by moving the optic forward or back to suit a specific shooters eye relief. Not much of an issue with a RDS, but big issue with a magnified optic.